i heard that if the energy in an object increases, so does its mass. Thus it is impossible to accelerate an object to the speed of light because due to the extreme kinetic energy, the mass is close to infinity. is this true or is there a different hypothesis to this?
2006-12-31 04:09:41 · 10 answers · asked by adi_trivium 1 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Physics
Yes, according to Einstein's Relativity mass increases with speed. We can't accelerate an object to the speed of light because that would require an infinite amount of energy and the object would acquire an infinite mass. Isn't it interesting? E=mc^2 is the most famous equation in Physics, is probably the simplest one and has implications wider than most of us can imagine! Happy New Year!
2006-12-31 04:29:03 · answer #1 · answered by Butterfly 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The mass of an object increases as it gets closer to the speed of light, but this is not due to E=MC^2. The mass increase is goes with the Lorentz factor, (1-(v/c)^2)^1/2, like time dilation and length contraction.
2006-12-31 13:58:43 · answer #2 · answered by ZeedoT 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes this is one of the "relativity" statements Einstein made.
As for Newton's three laws of motion, in normal speeds i.e. everyday speeds, including the fastest ones ever recorded, his laws support these. However as an object of a particular mass accelerates towards the speed of light, "weird things" start to happen, according to my Physics teacher. The mass of an object does tend to increase into infinity, which contradicts Newtons 3 laws.
2006-12-31 14:15:56 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is no evidence that mass actually increases. That is, I know of no experiments wherein an increase in the size dimensions of a mass has been demonstrated as the mass speeds up. Nor do I think anyone has shown the body in motion increases in density. Without one or both of these effects, I see no evidence that mass actually increases.
What increases is the inertia of that mass; so as its velocity approaches the speed of light, it gains more and more inertia. Inertia is simply the resistance to change in velocity; all inertial mass has inertia, which is why it's called "inertial" mass. Thus, as the rest mass of a body approaches the speed of light, it more and more resists further change (increase) in its velocity. It takes more and more energy to overcome that resistance...that inertia.
I posit that the resistance to change is something like drag forces on a body moving through the air. (Force and energy are related, but not the same.) As the rest mass increases in velocity relative to some field the body is moving in, there is increasing "drag force" or increasing inertia on it. One of the appealing analogs between drag forces and inertia is that both increase with the square of the velocity.
Thus, for a drag force, we have 1/2 Cd rho A v^2 = D = drag force and for mass inertia we have E = (m/sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2)) c^2 The sqrt factor is called the Lorenz transform and it's this thing that causes E --> infinity as the inertia of m --> infinity. It's this transform that says v is limited to less than c, because at v = c, it would take an infinite amount of energy to overcome the inertia of that mass (m).
Thus, both D and E vary with v^2. But D needs a gas (like air) for it to exist, what does E have...the hypothesized Higgs Field. This WAG, because it has not been proved, is a multidimensional field that pervades all of our known universe. It's something like air to bring in the analogy. But unlike air, it exists both in and outside our 4 dimensional world.
When quanta are aligned along one or more of the Higgs Field dimensions, those quanta exhibit no inertia...they are massless, like photons. But when they are not aligned (e.g., counter to) the field dimensions, the quanta have inertia...they show mass in our 4D universe that we can see. And when they are moving faster and faster against the grain (so to speak), they encounter more and more resistance to further increases in velocity...more inertia and, therefore, we say mass has increased even though that is not strictly correct.
The Higgs Field is quite controversial, but it does offer one way to explain what I believe is erroneously called the increase in mass. It is really the increase in the inertia of a mass as its speed approaches that of light.
2006-12-31 14:40:00 · answer #4 · answered by oldprof 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, energy is provided, mass increases - very difficult process in practice.
At speed of light, mass tends to infinity as it is clear from following formula:
m = m0/[sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2)]
m = mass at velocity v
m0 = mass at rest
v = velocity of mass
c = velocity of light
If v = c,
m = m0 / 0 = infinity
2006-12-31 13:35:55 · answer #5 · answered by Sheen 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It sure does. That's why super accelerators can create massive particles. And it is also true a particle of finite mass cannot reach the speed of light. You got it exactly correct.
2006-12-31 13:43:43 · answer #6 · answered by walter_b_marvin 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes, you're right, the mass of an object increases as it's speed increases
2006-12-31 12:10:56 · answer #7 · answered by ♪ ♫ ☮ NYbron ☮ ♪ ♫ 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Einstein made a mistake in his assumption that as a mass moves it gains greater mass. It seemed at the time as though it ought to work in this manner due to mass and energy being able to directly equate with one another. It requires some change in a mass in order for it to move, and in that energy and mass are interchangeable, and moving mass acquires energy potential in form of kinetic energy, what he proposed seemed correct.
The reason for stating he did not understand why it was that mass moved, may be found in the comparison of a mass moving near the speed of light (minus 25 mps) and an identical mass found in a location within our planet, 0.717 miles from its very center.
As a mass moves toward the speed of light it is not additional mass that accumulates within. The potential change within due to movement is found in the direction of its overall frequency. A mass at rest is able to have energy pass through a perfect conductor (in this instance electrical energy) in any direction at the speed of light. As a mass accelerates this is not true. The greater the speed of a moving mass, the less potential there is for energy to move at right angles to the direction of travel. In the illustration of our two masses, energy could have a potential of movement only 25 mps (miles per second) at right angles to the direction of travel. At the speed of light there would be zero potential for energy change in any direction. The mass and all energy potential would equal the speed of light and time would become zero.
Lastly, this is amplified in the physics trilogy; E = mc2, m = E/c2, and c2 = E/m. Notice that the singular unchanging value of these equations is that of “c2”. This is because this value is the basis of mass and energy. It is known to us as physical time. It is what we and all else in our universe is composed of. This value describes how long time exists before it moves into becoming our past, and it describes that there is no manner for us to interact with either the past or future, because they do not exist. All that exists is present time. Present time cannot compound in order for it to change into something else other than “c2”, and because mass is composed of the value of “c2” mass cannot exist within a mass.
http://timebones.blogspot.com and
http://360.yahoo.com/noddarc may be of interest
2006-12-31 13:41:35 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
True. This was noticed when sub-atomic particles were accelerated at close to the speed of light in cyclotrons.
2006-12-31 13:21:36 · answer #9 · answered by alexsopos 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes Mass can increase
2006-12-31 12:58:40 · answer #10 · answered by Suhas 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋